BIOLIFE PLASMA SERVICES LP v. ANGELO EROLES (2025)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

Biolife Plasma Services, LP, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a discovery order.

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, and it is within the discretion of this court to determine if a petition will be considered. Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Petitioner bears the burden to show that extraordinary relief is warranted, and such relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 224, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004).

Based on our review of the writ petition and the documents before us, we conclude petitioner has not demonstrated that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. See id. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844. Generally, this court does not intervene in discovery matters absent circumstances not alleged here. See Club Vista Fin. Servs., LLC v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 128 Nev. 224, 228, 276 P.3d 246, 249 (2012). Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1).

It is so ORDERED.

Bulla, C.J.

Gibbons, J.

Westbrook, J.